If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Without mentioning Occupy Wall Street, the Associated Press reported that "protestors" vandalized an Obama campaign office in Oakland, California, Friday evening. Other Big Media outlets, such as the Washington Post, ran the AP version of the story. That's excusable, since the AP made it look like a small story, and it happened on the opposite side of the continent from most WaPo readers. But the local CBS affiliate ran its own version of the story without revealing that the protestors were part of the Democrat-supported OWS movement.

By the time you click those links, the stories might have been updated, but as of 3pm Eastern Time -- fourteen and a half hours after the incident -- they still suppressed the truth about the protestors' affiliation. Unsurprisingly, some reader comments indicted the TEA Party for the vandalism, and cynics might suspect that the AP wanted its readers to jump to that conclusion.

However, in random acts of journalistic integrity, at least two other local TV stations did report the whole story. ABC affiliate KGO wrote, "A group of 100-200 Occupy Oakland protesters began marching down Telegraph Avenue after being denied a permit to protest near the First Friday event at Art Murmur." And Fox affiliate KTVU reported, "Around 9:30 p.m. Friday night, some demonstrators broke away from an Occupy Oakland protest march and smashed the windows of the campaign office on Telegraph Avenue."

Yes, every activist group has its lunatic fringe, but the Democrat sponsored, endorsed, and lauded Occupy movement appears to be comprised of nothing but lunatics. And just months ago, OWS was hailed as the face of the 21st century Democrat Party. Perhaps it is.

You're right Nancy. It's focused on violence and destruction of property and they hope to be effective.

She should have waited until she saw how OWS behaved before she gave them her endorsement.

Like she didn't know how they were going to behave... The Democrats wanted their own version of the Tea Party, but their grass roots are the same folks that showed up at the antiwar rallies that they ran while Bush was in the White House. The same players ran the show and the media gave it the same whitewash. OWS and the antiwar movement are the same people, the only difference is that without a war to protest, the incoherence and cluelessness of the movement was made even more obvious than it had been before.